tv [untitled] April 12, 2012 11:30am-12:00pm PDT
commissioner leigh: no. chairman mcdonnell: yes. commissioner melara: yes. commissioner leigh: i thought we were talking about the possibility of putting the conservatory back in district 8. this is going the other way. i appreciate the boundaries of the neighborhood have been submitted and everything, but we have not had much conversation about this and it seems like it is quite late to be entertaining new proposals that could have a serious -- serious impact. this is sort of like glen park /sunnyside type zone.
i am uncomfortable with not the general concept, that would have been fine to discuss it in an earlier stage. given where we are to move this into out of district 8 into district 7, i am not comfortable with that. >> can i first line? >> you sure can. >> i thought we were talking about the conservatory, not the rest of the neighborhood. that is glen park, actually, yes. i would say no. i change my vote. >> i will start over. i lost my place. commissioner tidwell: yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner mondejar: yes. vice-chair lam: yes.
>> we could do a satellite overly. -- overlay. >> 280. when we click on it, it comes back at i-280. >> the border between 7 and 11 ought to be to 80. and stuff that -- to render aid. stuff that is north of the freeway in that area ought to be in seven. i do not know where there are actual people in that zone, if there's a house there i missed or something. or homeless. the center line there really ought to be 280. [inaudible]
in that area. >> i wish we had not made the move we just made but we just did it. i do not know what else to say. >> are you proposing the needle? >> where is it now? >> in eight. >> i would propose to move that to seven. >> give me the population deviation. >> 27, a deviation of district 7 would become -0.28%, the deviation of district 8 would become 3.04%. >> thank you. commissioner tidwell: i will
>> can i ask , are we taking the question of the conservatory of the -- off the table? it would be tough to do given what we just did but to have the sunnyside conservatory remain in district 8? that was one of the public speakers, the point of view she raised. on monday night we moved that line to baden, taking the conservatory from 8 where it is now out in the world and we moved it to seven.
ok. based on the map, it would be non-contiguous a that would not be possible. i am puzzled by the fact that was what i thought motivated our interest in having the conversation and now as results -- as a result of the move we just made, we precluded the possibility of having that conversation. >> i do not think we have precluded any conversation. what i interpreted from the public comment is there was some concern that came up today or recently about the conservatory. the question was, where was it? some issue landed on the supervisor's desk because that is the supervisor who has that area where -- if it were in district 7, the concern would be routed to that supervisor and they would deal with it. the moves we just made unified
this sunny side neighborhood and put it in seven for better or worse but at least the conservatory runs with the past rest of the neighborhood rather than being separated from it as it sort of is now. >> all i am pointing out is the community member who provided feedback that motivated -- got this issue on a list for us to discuss, this is not responsive to that testimony. that is all. >> i do not hear -- remember hearing testimony from the
public about this move. >> that neighborhood has very little in common with district 7. >> thank you. is there a proposal? commissioner leigh: we will consider our proposals. >> ok, let me give it a try. i propose we take the blocks that we just moved from district eight to seven. restore this back to eight and include the conservatory and move that back to 8. can you give her a direction to highlight it? >> including this? >> that is the population of 390 people. the deviation for district 8
would be 3.58% and a deviation for district 7 would be -0.83%. >> to add the block that includes the conservatory? >> that would bring the population to 540 people with the deviation a 3.77% for district 8 and for district 72 - 1.20%. >> i will make that proposal. commissioner alonso: yes. commissioner melara: yes. vice-chair lam: no. commissioner mondejar: come back to me. commissioner pilpel: no. commissioner schreiber: no. commissioner tidwell: no.
ok. we will make ththat change. commissioner mondejar: yes. >> we will make that change. thank you. we will move -- to the 911 border. >> we are not doing that unless we do the overall rotation. that was what that was part of. let's go to 610. >> that is the mission bay, right? >> that is the block on the center right there.
the zero population changed. restore its the way it is. -- zero population change. >> that is mission bay? >> yes. it is south of 16th, where they're building a hospital is what i am told and it is the black -- the block east of third. where is the oil. this is one where i screwed up. it would restore the boundary to where it is. this is what it would do. i believe it is 0 population. quex the>> the other element of mission bay hospital would be
disconnected from this, correct? >> i do not -- yes, but i am not sure. i am not sure which things are north of 16th and which are south and what is being built and all that. i would advise that this area is more connected to dog patch and potrero hill than mission bay proper and there was a request to keep this with district 10. i was advised the opposite. that is why we're here. >> population and deviation? >> this is your population. >> we did get a handout on this. >> the division is 0.91%. and for this 6 -- district 6,
wondering sometimes when we say no to something based on the fact there was no real population in the area and we have ha a community testimony on that change that we go against it, i would like to hear the rationale against that. sometimes we're making changes for populations. when we're not exchanging for population, i am confused. i would like to hear it because we could be here all night and saying no to certain things that make no difference. >> it is the ucsf campus. it is all in six currently so i do not see a reason to move that portion where they're moving the
deviations? >> district 1, -4.99%. district 2, -4.91%. district 3,-[inaudible] district four, district 5, 2.12%, district 6, 0.87%. district 7,--2.8%. district 8, at 2.304%. district 9, 4.84%. district 10, -0.91%. district 11, 4.94%. >> thank you. >> could i go back to 7 and 8? >> give me the population
change anything. i am looking at our numbers. unless there is an urgency to add or delete something in some neighborhood, i would say that we probably want to just stop because we are within the numbers we want to be in every district. and so i am afraid that if we move something we will end up living something else and restoring some of the things we're already -- we had put on the map and people had believed we were going to put it. and leave it there. i am concerned about that. >> i would ask we take a 10 minute break to collect ourselves and insure there is nothing else we want to do.
que>> if we are -- if that will create a massive ripple, problem among ourselves, i say stock. any move will make anywhere is going to require a move someplace else -- any move we make anywhere will require a move someplace else. >> are there any other population related proposals? we will take a break before we go to non-population. so again, while we can never say never, this means we will move forward with non-population.
>> thank you. with that, we will resume our conversation on mapping, number three, just a restatement just prior to the break, we will consider non population proposals. we will then go to our consultants and have them walk us through to see, and that will be the last piece of are concluding a at final draft. any questions before we proceed?
hearing none, let's go to the golden gate park. >> ok. >> so the first proposal there, we have already made the change in the southeast corner, and that is a base move. that is cool. so starting by mclaren lodge, a and a and -- south of kennedy and the west of the line. a at -- a broader proposal to
see where we are before we begin the more fine division of the park, so the proposal on the table is to divide the park. miss sidwell? -- tidwell? the proposal is where they will talk about dividing the park at all. >> i think i am ok with where i currently stand. >> mr. schreiber, mr. pilpel, mr. leigh, mr. alonso.
but there probably are a couple of other things, but, yes, they are a major feature. this is reasonable. a little odd to look at, but i am wondering if there is any population in this highlighted area. a at -- the deviation of district 5 would be 1.3%. it would be -4.99%. >> i so propose. >> thank you.